Official Discussion of Multiplayer/Co-op in Skyrim

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 1:27 pm

It's good taking a break from multi-player games with all the lag and glitches - TES Forever singleplayer
User avatar
GEo LIme
 
Posts: 3304
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 7:18 pm

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 9:02 pm

I think people are trying to make this more complicated than it really is. The ability to play with a partner, or a few partners would not take anything away from the single player game (except maybe that those AWESOME boots that your friend stole). After reading through this most people would like to see an ability to play with a friend, not random matchmaking lobbies while praying not to get partnered with a total D bag.
Some people just don't understand this. They cry that this will take away from there precious single player content but that doesn't have to be the case.
User avatar
steve brewin
 
Posts: 3411
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:17 am

Post » Thu Aug 19, 2010 3:24 am

Co-op, or rather the only co-op I wouldn't mind, would be one that didn't break the lore of TES. A simple ability to add a faceless follower, which someone with a second controller could take control over would be fine. The dragonborn would go to say the fighters, mages, or theif/assassin's guild or whatever guild out there, talk to someone about hiring a guard or companion, pay some money, and then the second person would be able to creat their character along with being given base stats and weapons based on who the main character hired.

There is one they fear. Sure, there may be a few other people out there who can use thu-um, but only one who can svck out dragon's souls and use that to fuel their ability to learn other shouts. Only one person can do that, and that would be the main character. The second one would be a mere mortal, whom could get better at what they do just as the main character, only they don't have super powers. This would make it so random people wouldn't be able to suddenly apear at the bottom of a cave and just happen to know how to use dragonshouts which would make getting out of said cave a lot easier. I'm all good with that, but having two super dragonborn running around just wouldn't be acceptable in my book.
User avatar
Steph
 
Posts: 3469
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 7:44 am

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 9:38 pm

I think that the TES community is really becoming very stubborn, not wanting any siingle aspect or addition to TES to change, if that was the case we'd still be playing Arena.


I really don't see this.. The TES community has always been very quick to point out flaws in the games and make suggestions for improvement. What I do see is that Bethesda has bet on co-op not selling more titles and their engine in no way shape or form supports co-op (unless its very secret). This means I highly doubt we'd see any co-op in fallout or TES for at least 6-8 years.
User avatar
Sabrina garzotto
 
Posts: 3384
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 4:58 pm

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 5:47 pm

Again with your passionate response :), I lost count the amount of instances in that response where you brought up friends.

And am I getting a brush that you're insinuating that I dislike online games? If so you're mistaken.

And again you ignore the fact that the TES series have never been about anyone beyond one sole individual having sweeping effects on the world.

If you want another social medium THAT is all your looking for don't sugar coat it, there are a myriad of sixy games that do this. Never did I say it impossible to enjoy a game with a friend of course you can, that's your friend and obviously the game you enjoy. But you are not ignoring your friend, they are there for a reason. You shouldn't need a friend to play any TES game never did I imply multiplayer games are bad, and yes co-op is adding to the game, while other parts of it suffers, and of course D&D was a multiple person affair, otherwise Its be no different from daydreaming. We are in a new time unfortunately where our minds do not need to work as much and where games serve as a reprive from the hustle and bustle of the real world don't faux some divine truth that having a friend will immerse you into the game further, that's near backwards thinking if you really look at what your saying.

I don't see the logic in, if I am with my friends who are of my real life in skyrim, I will be more immersed in skyrim.


Notice I'm actually discussing enjoyably I might add rather than saying lolz! U lose skyrimz is SP pointless thread is pointless. Or whatever you've come to expect on the Internet these days or human nature for that matter.


I think you are still missing the core of my argument.

First, you keep mentioning online. To be clear, I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT ONLINE ANYTHING OR MMO, I AM SOLELY TALKING ABOUT A FORM OF DROP IN DROP OUT COUCH CO-OP. I am not against other forms of co-op if they can be accomodated, but this one is the most simple, basic, and in some ways the most enjoyable when one has a friend who one wishes to play with.

The games would still be about enjoying the sweeping effects of the world, it would merely allow you to share that experience with a friend. All the core aspects would still be the same. Mandatory co-op would be a restriction, and I would never advocate it. Mandatory singleplayer is also a restriction. It does not add anything to gameplay that you cannot play with a friend.

There are only a few current gen RPGs with good co-op, and that is what we are talking about. I don't give a damn that call of duty offers it, I don't play call of duty, I don't Like FPS games, I almost exclusively play games that have wizards, elves, monsters and the like, and I like to play those with friends., I like to explore with my friends, just as I would in real life. If I was offered the chance to venture into a world of magic and mystery and danger and grand adventures, I would DEFINITELY want a friend along with me. I think most people would. Most humans ( and lots of other mammals frankly, and even birds and fish) preffer to go into the unknown with a little companionship.

And yes, it certainly can immerse you more in the game to have a friend along. Your Friend becomes PART of the game, that is what you seem unable to recognize. Once your friend takes on that character, dons that helm or those robes, chooses a race. . . they are part of the ES world like you yourself are. Will you look at their character? Will you take note of the spells they favour? Will you comment on the weapons they choose or the armour they don? Of course. You do the same thing with all of the NPCs in the gaming world, Don't you? That is part of the experience. The leap forward in console and computer games was removing the need for the DM. The idea was never to remove the ability to play with friends. The benefit is that you don't HAVE to have a friend, relative, significant other or neighbor on hand in order to play your favourite game, NOT that you would be forever forbidden from enjoying such a game with another living human being.

The AI companions the games offer are but a pale immitation of what a real friend playing alongside you would be. For all the objections, all a good drop in/drop out co-op would essentially do, is take the AI companions theseries already makes available to you, and make that companion customizable, able to level up, and under the control of one of your real life friends, via the second controller. It would certainly add to immersion over the AI idiots you generally end up with. I had to create a spell, which I dubbed "damned fool's salvation" which both rendered my AI companion invisible AND put a charm spell on the strong enough to make a Dremora Valkynaz hop into bed with you (well. . . I was able to make them be friendly and not attack, at any rate). Why? Because I couldn't pass an enemy that the moronic companion didn't want to fight. We could be invisible and sneaking past a band of Minotaur Lords and the dummy would break the spell, and go charging out to fight to the death. I'm an Archmage between levels 37 and 55, the enemies are scaled up to level ridiculous, the AI companion is WAY overmatched. . . so I have to jump into the fight and kill everything before everything can kill the companion. Not part of my original plan. A REAL companion, controlled by a real friend, could confer with me about what we were going to do. If they were overmatched in a fight, they could hang back and be a distraction, or take on some of the lesser minoions of a serious foe, while I dealt with the ring leader etc.

The game is more immersive and more realistic because you approach it with your friend the way you would approach real life situations. You can actually convey your plans and wishes to a friend and vice versa, and then the pair of you can act out your joint plans and ideas in the game. It does not break immersion, it allows for a fuller immersion. Your belief, if you will, is enhanced by the presence of a fellow believer. Any psychologist will tell you that one's belief in something, be it a faith or a phantasm, is generally strengthened by the support of others who share that belief.

It would be, as has been said, optional at all times. But let us not pretend that it would somehow instantaneously break the realism of the game, or that it could not possibly enhance anyone's experience of the game.
User avatar
Laura Hicks
 
Posts: 3395
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 9:21 am

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 9:35 pm

No multiplayer, i cant even imagine Elder Scrolls as multiplayer game. For me, ES is a great fairy tale that you can live through, and i don't need some guys running around, i want to play it alone, read books, wonder around... :)
User avatar
Hilm Music
 
Posts: 3357
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 9:36 pm

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 1:45 pm

For me, I believe it would be fun to have pieces of multiplayer. I would mostly enjoy being about to battle friends in the Arena. I think this could be a really fun experience and it would give you a chance to improve your characters or just show them off.
It would be also cool if there were a side-quest or even expansion level (something like Bloodmoon/Tribunal/SI etc) that was co-op, however, I don't want to see the regular game made coop. If there were a seperate level, removed from the rest of the game strictly for co-op, it would make it a lot easier to deal with balancing stuff and would also give the ability for a co-op-friendly story. I don't know a lot about Skyrim's story cause I'm trying to stay away from spoilers, but it seems like you are the only (known) "Dragonborn." It would completely alter the story if your friend were also a dragonborn.

But in the end, I think I'd be happier without multiplayer, at least on release. I don't want an ES game built for multiplayer, so if the devs are working on that, they aren't focusing on more important issue. But if they decided to add in a co-op function for an expansion, I would be quiet pleased.
User avatar
Fiori Pra
 
Posts: 3446
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:30 pm

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:42 pm

Responses in red.



There are reasons no game but the occasional MMO will have cross platform online.

1. MS and Sony want you to buy games on their systems. If you want a game for the PS3 but want to play a game with your friend who only has a 360... you very well might buy the game for the 360 instead. So what advantage would MS have in that situation to let you play with your friend from your PS3? None. They would rather hope that people will buy more games on their system then allow cross platform gaming.

2. As I said before, MS did experiment with PC/360 cross platform gaming... and it didn't go well. Its technically possible of course, but its just so much easier to aim with a mouse then it is a controller and the result was 360 users getting beat up on by the PC gamers. That doesn't look good for MS and could even drive hardcoe gotta be the best type gamers to change platforms. Again, cross platform gaming might mean less sales so MS shut the program down. Heres a link to back that up btw... http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/ms-killed-pc-xbox-cross-platform-play

3. And yes... the networks are different, and would likely require a large cooperation between MS and Sony to make cross platform co-op possible. Of course neither company is going to do that unless there is going to be a big payoff, which there wouldn't be.

--------

So really, its pointless to even talk about cross platform play. Its not going to happen... not now, and probably not ever.

That still doesn't mean that MP wouldn't work in Skyrim. This community reminds me of the Battlefield community... over there people freak out that theres going to be a single player campaign and feel that its going to hurt the "main" game, which is MP. Here, people are so scared that MP would destroy Skyrim to they come up with every irrational (and even idiotic at times) reason they can think of to talk it down. Obviously it wouldn't, but people are so gloom and doom these days its impossible to talk sense to anyone.

Its all moot I guess since Bethesda is determined to stay in the 1990's with their "design philosophy" and ignore that MP is extreamly popular these days... or they are just saving it for the Elder Scrolls MMO we all know they are making.

Portal 2 ring a bell?
Like Portal 2 on PC and PS3 versions it may just be cross platform co-op on two platformns like Portal 2 why would it have to be Jimmy X360 and Jphnny PS3 playing together so we'll have to wait to April to see how well cross-platform co-op works.
User avatar
Spencey!
 
Posts: 3221
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 12:18 am

Post » Thu Aug 19, 2010 3:50 am

Just curious, any examples of an RPG that has done co-op well that you enjoy?



A few things things I find interesting about this discussion... Thanks for reading I know it got a bit lengthy!

First off Bethesda has a long way to go if as a company they're going to start making multiplayer titles. They'll need a lot of new staff and network code is not easy especially if they're trying to capture the size and scope of TES. It's a BIG component of their game engine and you cant just tack something like this on! More than likely, their engine would need an entire redesign from nearly the ground up in order to provide an experience as smooth as their competition provides (WoW, Guild Wars, etc). Its clear that Bethesda has already made a large investment in their niche of the market (single player RPGs) and have invested heavily in an engine that will provide the basis for future TES and Fallout titles. In other words, as a company they've bet that they can grow this market and continue to do well creating single player games. As a side note D&D is an inherently multiplayer game and I think that its interesting the same people that criticize the CRPG's for straying from D&D holy path (abandoning dice rolls, etc) also criticize any multiplayer CRPG component. I mean NWN was considered a true D&D based CRPG and it was heavily multiplayer.

Secondly to elaborate a bit on Bethesda's game market - co-op TES would be an interesting exercise but such a game would need to be meticulously planned and Bethesda already has found a successful formula and a great niche.

Lastly, what would the objective of such a TES game be? It seems to me early on the entire point of CRPGs (text based) was to eliminate the need for multiple players and thus the inherent unreliability of a game that requires so much human input. A computerized dungeon master and party members meant someone could boot up their PC at 3AM and play D&D, how wonderful! Early multiplayer PC games had each person on one side of the keyboard but no game was multiplayer only - what if Timmy's friend wasn't around to play or worse yet, what if Timmy didn't have a friend? Thankfully with the invention of the internet this has become largely a thing of the past and now games give you temporary friends to play with. :P My question is, what aspect of the game would be improved by extra human input? Companion AI of course, is the direct substitute for extra human participation in a game, but I think the novelty of fighting alongside your buddy in Oblivion as it stands would quickly grow old. The encounters would need to be readjusted for multiple players, how do you handle drops, how is player vs player handled etc.


Before I answer any of your quetions or reply to any of your comments, many of which are very insightful and well thought out, let me first say in big plain caps I AM NOT ADVOCATING ONLINE TES. I AM ADCOCATING A SIMPLE, OLD SCHOOL, BALDUR'S GATE STYLE LOCAL/COUCH DROP IN-DROP OUT CO-OP.

That is all I am personally asking for. I understand other people wanting more, Online and all that, but my personal wish is much more simple. Good old, plug in a second controller, and have a customizable leveling friend as your companion rather than an AI stand in. It would not be PvP. PvP is not really co-op, even though it is a form of multi, or at least two player. Co-op is, as you know, an abbreviation of cooperative, and PvP is pretty much the opposite of that.

Fable III and the old Baldur's Gate Games from the last generation of Xbox are perfect examples of Co-op RPGs which I greatly enjoyed. I know that some of Fable's designers like to make the claim that they are an RPG style game. . . but whatever, call it what you will, we all know an RPG when we see one. Now Baldur's Gate was PURE RPG. Indeed, it was set in Forgotten Realms which is an immediate member of the family of universes which belong to the larger Dungeons and Dragons multiverse. Was it as good as Elder Scrolls? Of course not. And one of the reasons, of course, is that the game is about a hundred million years old by console gaming standards. It is extremely outdated, but in its day it was as good as most and better than many rival RPGs which did not offer any form of co-op. Baldur's gate was a fairly extensive and expansive (for its time) RPG which perfected drop in/drop out (i.e. the second player can bring a saved character in and out of your game without you having to start a new game to accomodate them) in a time when most comparable RPGs didn't offer co-op at all, and most of them were not any better as RPGs in terms of story or customization, or even graphics, despite their lacking that option.

Your comment on the inherent contradiction of people saying CRPGs need to be more traditional and then complaining about CRPGs having multiplayer options even though the traditional RPGs they want to see more elements of were innately multiplayer, is Amazing Grace Gospel, but you are preaching to the choir, here. Lol.

As to the console replacing the DM and the need for real life companion players. . . it was the goal and a GREAT thing to replace the NEED for co-players, but it should never have done away with the option of having them. And that was not the intent. But what began as a limitation in new technology soon became a laziness about adding features that designers could get away with leaving out, and eventually became an unfortunate institutional aspect.

As far as gameplay, The encounters really wouldn't need adjusting. You just up or lower the difficulty. As to the drops. . . I think, as with Fable III, a game like Elder Scrolls, with its huge focus on the single central character, would need to remain first player dominant. I.E. the world does not rearrange itself to accomodate the second player, but it does allow the second player to exist, acknowledges their presence, and allows them to fully interact. It allows them to be fully a part of the world, but it does not give them the tools to hijack the game from the first player, nor to supplant the first player.
User avatar
Max Van Morrison
 
Posts: 3503
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 4:48 pm

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 7:31 pm

I feel bad for some of you, who never got to experience GOOD co op rpg games both online and IRL (Pen and paper rpgs).

Going through an RPG is fun, it's a blast, it's why most of us are here on these forums. However experiencing that with another REAL person playing together, exploring, doing quests, is extremely fun.

NWN
Baldur's Gate

. . . They were both a blast, and Baldur's gate is hailed as one of the BEST rpgs of all time. If it can do co op mp back then and still have great single player, I fail to see why you guys think having simple Co op (not pvp, not MMO, just SIMPLE co op) would be soooooooo bad.

I think that the TES community is really becoming very stubborn, not wanting any siingle aspect or addition to TES to change, if that was the case we'd still be playing Arena.


Amen! Allelujah! :hugs: :foodndrink:
User avatar
Miguel
 
Posts: 3364
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:32 am

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 10:30 pm

That's fine, but here's a question:

How would you deal with Modded Games?

Elder Scroll Games have shipped with Construction Kits since Morrowind. Bethesda is very supportive of the Mod Community and by the end of a Elder Scrolls game's life cycle, the Mods available general push the engine above and beyond what it is initially designed to be capable of supporting (Thus requiring Script Extenders for some Mods).

Local Co-Op sounds fine and dandy on paper, but you're forgetting TES is a Multi-Platform affair. If there was to be Co-Op, then it's hardly fair for Console Players to get access to such a feature without the PC clientele also being included. And then you run into not simply "troll-like abominable statements", but simple design incompatibility.

How can Jimmy, playing his copy of Skyrim on Xbox, play with his friend John who is on the PC, if John is running a Gameplay Changing Mod that requires Script Extension that Jimmy has no access to? Do you simply segregate the communities? If so, how do you solve the problem of Co-Op between PC users not running the same mods?

The Elder Scrolls design philosophy is simply not compatible with Online Play of any variety. That's not Trolling, that's simply stating the facts.


I have said over and over, I AM TALING ABOUT DROP IN/DROP OUT COUCH CO-OP, NOT ONLINE!!! Stop telling me why online would not work when I have never once advocted it to begin with! lol

As to your other questions. . . Friedhiem pretty much answered it perfectly for me. I think PC gamers should have the co-op mode, but it isn't like ES doesn't already allow things on some platforms that it won't allow on others. I would LOVE to mod my game. I would LOVE to play as a Dremora or a male Aureal the way some of my friends with PC mods are able to do. . . but, I have an xbox, so no dice. Oh well.
User avatar
stevie critchley
 
Posts: 3404
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 4:36 pm

Post » Thu Aug 19, 2010 1:51 am

Attempting to say co-op wouldn't work because TES is a cross platform game is the lamest argument ever. There are hundreds of multiplatform games that have multiplayer. Guess what, they don't get to play with each other, so what. Don't think any sane person would get bent out of shape about it.
User avatar
Francesca
 
Posts: 3485
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 5:26 pm

Post » Thu Aug 19, 2010 2:57 am

Before I answer any of your quetions or reply to any of your comments, many of which are very insightful and well thought out, let me first say in big plain caps I AM NOT ADVOCATING ONLINE TES. I AM ADCOCATING A SIMPLE, OLD SCHOOL, BALDUR'S GATE STYLE LOCAL/COUCH DROP IN-DROP OUT CO-OP.
[snip]


Thanks for the reply - I understand your position on this completely and I can't say I disagree with you after reading your propositions. Unfortunately I've never played Fable III and in fact I was unaware it had co-op :blush2: but from what I understand from some of the reviews I read (albeit a while ago) some were the game has become less and less RPG and more and more adventure (?). I think this has to be the root of the resistance against this feature: fear that it will change the developers goals for the game away from what they are now (again from what I've gleaned from reviews, a lot of people complained about Fable II's co-op, thus it was expanded upon in the next installment, though I'm not involved in that community). As for BG I think a D&D based game inherently lends itself easily to co-op/multiplayer. As a series TES is very nearly in it's own genre, hardly D&D based at all except perhaps in concept - I'm sure there are a lot of variables here both technical and design wise I can't even think of. The bottom line unfortunate fact is as soon as your idea of a good co-op is implemented there will be a large movement of people who clamor for it to be broadened in scope, further polished, etc. Bethesda would probably need an extra 5-10 people on the payroll to make it all work how we'd expect. :( As a game developer BGS will do what they need to in order to make their games successful - so in a few years, who knows!
User avatar
Stacy Hope
 
Posts: 3391
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:23 am

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 2:51 pm

I think it would be nifty to have a small-large party of friends (16 people) in one game (probably the hosts game only) and the difficulty increases judging on the amount of players.
User avatar
Damian Parsons
 
Posts: 3375
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 6:48 am

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 8:19 pm

No multiplayer, i cant even imagine Elder Scrolls as multiplayer game. For me, ES is a great fairy tale that you can live through, and i don't need some guys running around, i want to play it alone, read books, wonder around... :)


This.
User avatar
Wayne W
 
Posts: 3482
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 5:49 am

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:43 pm

Co-op would be an amazing feature. Of course it would have to be done via system link or online. It would definitely be awesome to have a friend sharing the experience in one playthrough. There should only be the one dragonborn though. The second player would just be an aid to this dragonborn perhaps starting in jail with him or randomly meeting him in a dungeon or town. (whenever the second player joins the game) Multiplayer seems unlikely but Bethesda is very passionate about it's games and especially the Elder Scrolls series. So maybe they'll look to into for this game or if there is no time, they might just put it in to one of their future games. I'm looking at the Demon's Forge game right now for my co-op fix, but it doesn't look as customizable as I'd like it to be.
User avatar
Amiee Kent
 
Posts: 3447
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 2:25 pm

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:07 pm

You know what ?
I'd prefer the time Bethesda could use to rethink how to rebalance the game and remake every single quest so it is multiplayer ready to be used for creating more content for the single player,or more hours of bug testing.

I really don't want them to spend all that time it would take to alter the whole game to be co-op ready just for that.
The only multiplayer that I'd no mind see is a battle mode where you and your friends join a fight at an online arena,and kill each other! :celebration:
Considering that we will play with our single player characters with all of our stats carried on,and without making it possible to other players to loot our dead body and steal our precious items of course!
:whistling:

Just something like Oblivion's arena,but fighting against your friends instead of npcs.
User avatar
Hope Greenhaw
 
Posts: 3368
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 8:44 pm

Post » Thu Aug 19, 2010 12:15 am

To think that people here old the belief that multiplayer and mods are incompatible when the BIGGEST modding community ever was started in the old age for multiplayer games mostly (Quake, Unreal, Half Life etc...) is astonishing.



MULTIPLAYER IS NOT INCOMPATIBLE WITH MODS! Any other opinion is foolish.


Coop gaming is awesome, any game that includes it is just plain better than a game without it in my opinion. Coop gaming doesn't mean playing with people you don't like either so cut the crap with how little jimmy will come in your game and ruin it!
User avatar
Claire Mclaughlin
 
Posts: 3361
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 6:55 am

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 11:51 pm

So let me try to look at your prespective. you need friends, to enjoy the lore, scope and depth of the series....

Right, when playing the game, you will be more engrossed with your friends, and what they are doing. the whole point of being SOCIAL that is multiplayer is focusing on your friends, not whats going on in the game. if your getting bored, thats what other games are for. not beating it to death and trying to find some reprive for the game.



No, I want co-op to enhance the enjoyment of the series. You see things too black and white, that multiplayer is purely about friend interaction and single player about enjoying the game itself with no middle ground. Friends can enhance the enjoyment of a game without being the focal point.

For example, there could be a mead hall somewhere in the wild where your circle of friends tend to make their home. You do your own thing but perhaps one of them needs help finding some ancient artifact that they could use for their playing style. Perhaps you are a stealth and trap specialist and could prove useful...much like that one quest in Bruma with the wrongly accused "vampire" and his treasure seeking brotherhood. Or you could just be a group of bandits that waylay travelers for gold. Whatever, it adds more dynamics and options...and by its nature is optional.


The ONLY argument the "no-multiplayer ever!" faction has to stand on is the resources needed to impliment it might be better used elsewhere in development. Philosphically I don't think you guys have anything.
User avatar
Floor Punch
 
Posts: 3568
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 7:18 am

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 7:39 pm

All I can say to this is no!!!! Please do not waste development time on any muliplayer or co-op. I don't want Skyrim to be like Two Worlds 2 where half of the game is basically nothing because it is reserved for multiplayer.

If people want a MMO have Zenimax Online make an Elder Scrolls MMO. Otherwise, please do not ruin/lessen the single player experience by adding multiplayer or co-op.
User avatar
Tinkerbells
 
Posts: 3432
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 10:22 pm

Post » Thu Aug 19, 2010 1:41 am

Its seems the advocates for Co-op here merely support it to support it, and believe those that are against it are, Antisocial, against it to be against it, trolls, have unfounded reasons, and or do not no what they are talking about.

and Im scratching my head because its borderline comical. this is voicng against Multiplayer in ->TES<- not the world of games yes Ainur games that only sport Multiplayer and have nothing else to offer do exist and leaving out genre's like the FPS's is silly, they are games to.

Honestly what would you have Done with the Fable series after you finished them, Play them over? for what a maximum of 3 times? yeah the only reason why 2-3 are being played as much as they are is because they have Co-op and people are beating each other and enemies senseless until it gets stale. Fable 2-3 are GEARED towards Co-op in mind, they've been structured to that function and beyond that yes, there is nothing more to it.

no one has given reason as to why co-op should be included in --->TES<-- beyond that they want their friends in, thats it they want their friends in. apparently its more immersive. and yeah I hear you perfectly clear about what Kind of Co-op/multiplayer you're speaking for, but your not heeding certain facts, and arguing against them is all kinds of fallacy. I'd go so far as to say some of you are utterly biased and no matter what is said, you are correct? what part of TES is a singleplayer only game is not coming clear? within the game itself is clearly voicing a lone hero, not even permanent Companions so Ainurs example about AI falling short of being true companions is moot, and I feel your insistance on bringing that up like Im not reading your posts signifies a personal desire to have companions, nothing more it seems.

Bethesda studios is a Singleplayer only Game developement Company, this was even stated in the earlier threads by a Dev.

If they tried to make multiplayer functions in their TES installments, which is not their function. Yes it will change the focus of the game.
If they handed partial reigns over to another Dev company to put in the Multiplayer aspects you oh so desire (this includes Co-op...its MULTIPLAYER) YES it will effect the game.

Its not their focus, and for a game like TES it will either be half assed or something else will have to go or change significantly, this is true aspect. im not saying it to say it

Yes it will effect mods, no two individuals games are the same when they are sporting mods if you've played any multiplayer game that includes a plethora of maps you will see even in that regards as to who has what maps also come into play. this is about Multiplayer inclusion, saying you are for co-op doesnt change anything the factors still stand

Wulfgar --its not black and white, you want friends to help you enjoy the game, thats your stance really. mutliplayer IS about having friends or playing with others, what exactly are you trying to say? there is no middleground, it allows you to play with friends/other people really? and sure its optional, an option that people don't want to use because they have enough games that do it, there is no aspect of Oblivion or Morrowind or dagger fall that I did pay for and not use.

The series has always been about the lone hero, ALWAYS

Battlespire one individual vs the Deadra and Dagon,

Arena one hero vs Jagar tharn and his forces,

Redgard, Cyrus and his quests to save his sisters soul by himself, he didnt have companions follwing him every step of the way and often had to face significant situation on his OWN.

Morrowind, Some nobody being thrusted into scathing political events and being shored about against the Demi God Dagoth Ur, and subsequently Vivec(if they choose) Almalexia, HIRCINE for sanities sake.

Oblivion, enough said.

There is nothing beyond people wanting to play with their friends, and thats not the focus of the game. simple as that, their are other games that do this quite well, infact TW2 has a beautiful landscape and can sport the same immersion and combat tactics people want to employ so dearly with their friends.
User avatar
Britney Lopez
 
Posts: 3469
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 5:22 pm

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 2:23 pm

All I can say to this is no!!!! Please do not waste development time on any muliplayer or co-op. I don't want Skyrim to be like Two Worlds 2 where half of the game is basically nothing because it is reserved for multiplayer.

If people want a MMO have Zenimax Online make an Elder Scrolls MMO. Otherwise, please do not ruin/lessen the single player experience by adding multiplayer or co-op.

Do you see anyone here advocating for an MMO? No? Then why act like it?
User avatar
Dark Mogul
 
Posts: 3438
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 11:51 am

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:27 pm

Do you see anyone here advocating for an MMO? No? Then why act like it?

People are not directly asking for it. They are indirectly asking for it. The reason they say they want it and thing things that could be done seem like MMO stuff to me.

EDIT: Couch drop in co-op (offline) would be ok as long as it does not hamper the development of the main game too much.
User avatar
Chica Cheve
 
Posts: 3411
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 10:42 pm

Post » Wed Aug 18, 2010 8:58 pm

Personally I hope they never add co-op or the likes to TES, if I want multiplayer I play wow, for single player I play TES. Multiplayer of any kind would just take unneccesary development time, leading to other cool features having to be scrapped and thus making my single player gaming experience worse :P
User avatar
Vahpie
 
Posts: 3447
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 5:07 pm

Post » Thu Aug 19, 2010 1:19 am

I see everyone pulling for co-op and my mind is blown! Back in the day, no one wanted that because it would break the lore by having two (or more) pc's. I'd rather have non canon multiplayer (objective game types, death match, etc). Your character's loot transfers over, but any item that may be an artifact or a special weapon should just lose its name (or weapons are reduced to their base stats). If there is mp, I'd rather it be something that doesn't require any explanation and can just be, rather then having to put an explanation in about why co-op is possible
User avatar
Yama Pi
 
Posts: 3384
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:51 am

PreviousNext

Return to V - Skyrim